Pages

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Starbucks is switching back to their original logo, which Howard Schultz described as "bare-breasted and Rubenesque; [it] was supposed to be as seductive as coffee itself". So, of course, the crazies who equate sex with the devil are going...crazy...over it. Can't we send them back to the 16th century? they said "The company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."

The Bush administration did set up its own intelligence shops to disseminate faulty intelligence about Iraq’s alleged WMD. But “every” agency in the “world” did not buy the spin — several U.S. agencies were highly skeptical

Oh, this is rich! Lawrence O'Donnell calls Pat Buchanan out for criticizing Scott McClellan for the very same thing he did under Nixon: not saying anything or opposing or resigning in the face of wrongdoing.

Can you say "Catholics hate women"? How many Catholics "turn the other cheek" at these anti-women policies their church "holy" officials are still supporting with extreme consequences for disobeying? Seriously! Isn't it at the point where doing nothing to challenge the Vatican on these ancient misogynistic practices and beliefs means that you are complicit in perpetuating them (i.e. just as guilty)?

“The Vatican issued its most explicit decree so far against the ordination of women priests on Thursday, punishing them and the bishops who try to ordain them with automatic excommunication. The decree was written by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and published in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, giving it immediate effect. A Vatican spokesman said the decree made the Church’s existing ban on women priests more explicit by clarifying that excommunication would follow all such ordinations. Excommunication forbids those affected from receiving the sacraments or sharing in acts of public worship. Rev. Tom Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, said he thought the decree was meant to send a warning to the growing number of Catholics who favor admitting women to the priesthood.”

Ouch. Even after winning the nomination McCain still can only get 70% of his own party's votes--which is not unlike other state totals. And to have Ron Paul continue to get double-digits is very intriguing.

Friday, May 30, 2008

Does anybody who isn't employed by or related to George Bush still deny that the administration wasn't truthful about Iraq? Or that the news media could have done a better job in the months preceding the war?

This was a rhetorical question in the article, but the answer is "yes", unfortunately. Who are these who think the media did just a fine job of covering the run-up to the war? Well, the media themselves. I watched David Gregory defend himself with disgust on Hardball. Read this article Nieman Watchdog > Commentary > A refresher on how the press failed the people for more examples, but also some examples where the press rightly criticized itself. Given that even many journalists and media outlets have actually admitted some level of failing, it is even more baffling how many still claim that everything was as good as it could have been. This article is also notable in that it has larger excerpts from McClellan's book criticizing the press than have been covered elsewhere.

It is too bad that someone hasn't trotted out the names of the media executives who were quashing critical stories. I'd like to see some of them in the spotlight and hear their response to the charges.

The bottom line of course is that those media correspondents who are being so defensive indicate that they don't think they needed to do anything differently so we'll probably continue to see the same kinds of shoddy journalism and amplification of talking points that overemphasize distortions or lies.

The press amplifies the talking points of one or both parties in its coverage, thereby spreading distortions, half-truths, and occasionally outright lies in an effort to seize the limelight and have something or someone to pick on. And by overemphasizing conflict and controversy and by reducing complex and important issues to convenient, black-and-white story lines and seven-second sound bites the media exacerbate the problem, thereby making it incredibly hard even for well-intentioned leaders to clarify and correct the misunderstandings and oversimplifications that dominate the political conversation.

But it is also good to see New York State move to recognize same-sex marriages as well.

How can people compartmentalize so that they don't see how "Separate but Equal" is the same argument as "Civil unions but not "marriage""? "Separate but equal is a set phrase denoting the system of segregationthat justifies giving different groups of people separate facilities orservices with the declaration that the quality of each group's publicfacilities remain equal." Hello? If that is illegal and immoral, then why not these laws? It's the same thing and I predict eventually they will either be repealed or ruled unconstitutional. In fact, it violates the Fourteenth Amendment (Equal Protection Clause)

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

I just got my second notice about my pending economic stimulus act rebate and saw to my dismay that it divulges the last 4 of my SSN. They mask out all the least-secret parts but leave the last 4 digits. Lame! Look for this format on the right-hand-side of the letter inside the very conspicuous envelope: XXX-XX-1234

Monday, May 19, 2008

One of the annoying things about VS Express (other than it for some reason not saving my user preferences) is that there is not an easy way to debug nunit tests from within the UI. There is also no way to attach to a process to debug, which is going to limit asp.net development utility. Maybe VS 2008 Express is improved in this regard? I'll download and see.

Here are two great ways to debug nunit tests. I opted for the simpler option of creating a .csproj.user file and adding the section to each of the <PropertyGroup&gt; sets like so:

Sunday, May 18, 2008

I am really getting tired of seeing the male response to crap like this stupid video that Michelle Malkin created involve sexual domination rhetoric against women. It debases the speaker and taints the debate and opponents of Malkin by proxy.

Unbelievable. I think the responses to the video are far, far, far worse than the video.

“Massive investment in CCTV cameras to prevent crime in the UK has failed to have a significant impact, despite billions of pounds spent on the new technology, a senior police officer piloting a new database has warned. Only 3% of street robberies in London were solved using CCTV images, despite the fact that Britain has more security cameras than any other country in Europe.The warning comes from the head of the Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office (Viido) at New Scotland Yard as the force launches a series of initiatives to try to boost conviction rates using CCTV evidence” (05/06/08)

Monday, May 5, 2008

I had to turn this into an open letter response. I saw several of these messages being posted to blogs without any response. Most likely because it is so inflammatory and haphazard.

But, it was so tiring that I had to stop part way though. Maybe someone else can post other replies to finish this out...if you can make it that far.

-Jason

-----Inline Message Follows-----

I did not write
this.... But?????????????

FoodFor Thought...

We'renot sure anyone really likes any of the choices for President, but

this guy makes some goodpoints. a few naughty words spoken, but

whoeverthis guy is, he seems to be on target.

"We're not sure"? Who is "we". There are a tonof people who are passionately in support of Barack Obama and I haveseen this first-hand at precinct Caucuses. And there is a similarfervor among the Hillary supporters.

After long and serious thought, I have decided to endorse Senator

John McCain for President. Ihave always voted for the person and have not

voted for anyone because somepolitical party was telling me who I should

vote for.

So? This type of paragraph in chain emails is one that tries to trick
you into thinking the person is non-partisan when you can tell right
from the tone of the discussion and the lack of facts that this author
is highly partisan. Don't fall for this trick.

We all know the choices by nowand, that said, I do believe that the

process of selecting a chiefexecutive is deeply flawed. The words "money"

and "special interests" come tomind, among many others.

Again, so? Are you implying that somehow McCain is not subject to
these same influences when the dems are?

Here's the way I see it:

Barack Obama, you are afine public speaker. You are also an

extremely liberal Senator

As if being "liberal" is a bad thing. But, contrary to popular
propaganda, Obama is not the most liberal senator. By the most
objective measure around, he has several colleagues more "liberal" than
he is. Again, not that there is, or should be, anything wrong with
that. See voteview: http://voteview.com/

from theState of Illinois, which has a long and

rich history of politicalcorruption of the first magnitude. Youare indeed

tolerate your insults.It has nothing at all to do with your skin color.

Does anyone think this makes any sense at all? Does anyone actually
think this is a coherent, logical thought progression? I'm beginning
to think this whole thing is a long string of non-sequiturs (not
surprisingly)

As

a matter of fact, it would be soCOOL to finally have an African-American

for President. What a greatstatement that would be to the entire world that

we are indeed the greatestcountry on earth!

But, unfortunately,

General Colin Powell is not running, and YOU are

NOT the man for this job !

Where did this come from? Not even a shred of rationale? "If we had a black president, it should be Colin Powell, not Barack"

Wright. It is a matter of recordthat this has been your church for over 20

years. It is a matter of recordthat you were married there by this very

pastor, and that your childrenwere baptized there.

So what? There is no point here. Barack never said he "never heard the sermons".

The good Reverend sawfit to visit Khadafy in Libya with you and to

give a lifetime achievementaward to Louis Farrakhan, of all people.

In the words of a good friend of mine, this is "horseshit". The author
is trying to say that Obama went _with Wright_ to visit Farrakhan?
There is no evidence of that. In fact, Wright went with Farrakhan to
visit Kadafy. This author doesn't even have facts, let alone have them
in the right order.

We have all now seen

excerpts of his sermons all over the airwaves

by now. And you have publiclystated that this man IS your "spiritual

mentor".

I defy you to find a quote of this. The press has referred to him in this way, but Obama has denied this:

"He was never my "spiritual mentor." He was -- he was my pastor. And so
to some extent, how, you know, the -- the press characterized in the
past that relationship, I think, wasn't accurate."

BUT, your pastor is NOT

the reason I am NOT voting for you.

Okay, let me guess. You're not voting for Obama but you're not going
to tell us why. You're just going to continue with more non-sequiturs.

His

words were disturbing enough,but it is your own HUGE church congregation,

seen jumping, hooting andhowling to his words in the background that

disturb me the most. And pleasedon't tell me you attended church there and

never once heard a "discouragingword" in the 20 years you attended there.

Don't tell me, that in additionto the good reverend, that you are now not

having anything to do with allthose other people seen hooting and howling

out in the audience in thebackground of his fiery tirades.

Oh, it is the congregation! Seriously?! Guilt by association? Surely
Wright has said some strange things but lots of what he has said rings
true. I bet this guy hasn't heard more than a soundbite though.

But what about the kinds of hateful, judgemental, crazy things that white pastors are saying, such as Hagee,

"I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive toGod, and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that.""military confrontation with Iran is foretold in the Bible as a necessary precondition for the Second Coming."

"Hagee, pastor of
the 16,000-member Cornerstone Church, last week had announced a "slave
sale" to raise funds for high school seniors in his church bulletin,
"The Cluster." The item was introduced with the
sentence "Slavery in America
is returning to Cornerstone" and ended with "Make plans to come and
go home with a slave.""

"Do you know the
difference between a woman with PMS and a snarling Doberman pinscher? The
answer is lipstick. Do you know
the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with
a terrorist."

He is even alleged to have made some very anti-Catholic statements,
although I have yet to see an original in-context quote of Hagee making
these statements. I don't believe Bill Donohoe as a credible quoter,
since I think he's afraid of being out-crazied (Donohoe said,
""Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it")

Oh, and yet this anonymous author is fine with McCain who said, ""all I can tell you is that I am very proud to have Pastor John Hagee's support." Hypocrite!

Even Oprah Winfrey got

disgusted and walked out. I am no Oprah fan,

but still she did the rightthing.

I could not find anything about Oprah getting "disgusted" and
"walk[ing] out". She did leave the church due to Wright eventually.

Now YOU look me in the

eye and ask me to believe that you never

heard such language in all theyears you attended there ! This is like me

telling you that I attendeddozens of Klan rallys and never once heard the

"N" word. Yep. And Bill Clinton"did not inhale".

Just because he heard it, doesn't mean he believes it. And I don't see
any particular quotes you think we should be outraged about. Again, I
don't think you've heard/read more than soundbites.

Yes, Mr. Obama, we all

have friends who have said stupid things that

embarrassed us, but NOW you haveasked me to believe something that is so

incredibly stupid that you aretelling me that I am just stupid enough to

believe you. THAT is the mainreason that I will never vote for you.

But, you'll believe all the stupid crap peddled by McCain? Really?

I am

deeply sorry, that in a countyteeming with enormously talented African

Americans who would make a goodPresident, that the political system has

chosen YOU.

You haven't shown any reason why. Just ranted...

You

are a pathetic and plastic excuse for an American, who will

not even salute the Flag duringthe Pledge of Allegiance. God forbid you

ever get near the Oval Office.

OMFG! This guy is pulling out all the stops! This is such a load of
propagandic BS that has been totally debunked. Obama is a model of the
American dream, building himself up from adversity. The author here is
an idiot.

Now, did I mention Bill

Clinton ?

AH YES ! This brings usto MRS. WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, who this

candidate really is, in spite ofall the other names she may care to call

herself.

What? Does that make sense to anyone?

This "feminist" piece

of work of course would like to be referred

to as MS. and we all know whowears the pant suit in that family.

Oh, so now she's a feminist (in quotes, whatever that means)? Any
empowered woman is a feminist? What evidence/rationale? Oh yeah,
there isn't any provided. Moving along...

MS. Clinton, (sugar), it

is just as depressing to realize that there

are dozens of women who wouldalso make great Presidents. But, fortunately,

the horrible state of theselection process has selected YOU.

What is this guy talking about? I'm no big Hillary fan but this is just stupid.

Ms.

Clinton,

I'm sorry, but you could nottell the truth if we waterboarded your

worthless ass !

You might have something there about her not being forthright, although
bringing in the "waterboarding" aka "water torture" is a nice
right-wing touch, don't you think?

Still you play the role

of the "embarrassed but dignified noble

wife".

Why all the quotes? What are you trying to say with this statement?

What utter malarky !

On what basis? Oh yeah, he doesn't need to give one.

I amnot voting for you for a world of reasons,

but the main one is the same asmy not voting for Senator Obama.

You still have not made a coherent argument describing what this position is and further, how McCain does not.

You

persistently insult myintelligence.

Well, judging by this insane rant, it should be insulted.

It COULD be conceivably possible that

you did not know about MonicaLewinsky, extremely remote, but possible if we

stretch our imaginations a bit.But you turn around and then ask me to

believe that you also did notknow about Paula Jones and the legion of other

women who were chewed up andspit out by your lecherous excuse for a

husband. Puleese turn off thisbroken record !!!

What is the broken record? Bill Clinton? So, your point is that her
husband was a bastard and you are going to presume that you know what
she did/did not know (there is no evidence provided where she claims to
not have known nor that she has "ask[ed] [you] to believe" this).
Plus, I don't believe that Paula Jones was proven.

But let's set aside yourhubby's flagrant pecadillos.

Yes, let's not impugn her by criticizing someone who is not her, Bill Clinton. Moving along...

and the myriad other corruptionsthat seem to stick to you like your ugly

face.

There wasn't any there-there with those "scandals". Who do you think
was responsible for the flood of false accusations? And, again,
nothing about Hillary specifically mentioned. Don't you find that odd?

So our former Presidentcan't keep his dick in his pants. The REAL

issue is that he committedperjury under oath when he lied about it and the

pathetically-attempted cover-upthat followed.

I guess the author couldn't "keep [it] in his pants" long enough to
avoid going back to impugning Hillary by criticizing Bill. Not even a
whole paragraph could he wait!

Like you, he is totallyincapable of telling the truth. He could not

do it if you tortured him, andin voting for you, we would get the BOTH of

you, all over again.

Enough with the Bill talk. What about Hillary!?

The samefolks who could have taken out Osama Bin Laden

over 3,000 dead Americans ago !

OMFG! I'll refer you to the PDB that Bush and company IGNORED
entitled, "Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US". BUSH did NOTHING
about Bin Laden or Al Quaeda. Clinton, and Richard Clarke, were doing
something about it. See anything about what Richard Clarke has said.

And please stop tellingme that you have "8 years of experience" to

lead us. You were the freakin'first lady already, not the Commander in

Chief. Jeez ! The sum of your"experience" is that of the most worrisome and

incompetent meddling in thehistory of the White House.

There is some truth to the first part, but the last part is just ad-hominem. Where is the evidence?